gms | German Medical Science

At the annual meeting of the German Society for Medical Education 2011 in Munich, the winners of the GMA award for young medical educators were awarded for the sixth time for outstanding achievements in medical university teaching by the board of the German Society for Medical Education (GMA). This prize is set up by the working group young medical educators of the German Society for Medical Education, which has set itself the goal of improving and strengthen the appreciation, support and training opportunities for young professionals in higher education. A total of six applications from 6 locations were submitted for the competition (Aachen, Essen, Munich, Tübingen, Würzburg and Witten-Herdecke).

The assessment of applications is carried out by a 10-member committee, proposed by the GMA Board, according to the criteria for quality and sustainability/innovation of the projects (http://gesellschaft-medizinische-ausbildung.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=179&Itemid=317&lang=en [1], [2], [3], [4]. Between 0-2 points (0=not met, 1=partially met, 2=met) could be awarded for each of the eight award criteria (criteria points).

In addition, the committee members selected the three best applications from their perspective, with a brief justification, and awarded favourite points (1^st place=3 points, 2^nd place=2 points, 3^rd place=1 point). The sum of the criteria and favourite points awarded by the committee members for each submission were determined. The three candidates with the highest scores were invited as finalists to the annual meeting of the GMA.

The entire board of the GMA then unanimously chose the two final winners from amongst the three finalists during the board meeting.

The following, equally-weighted winners were chosen:

1.

Dr Nicole Rafai, MPH, Aachen with the project Methodological Diversity in Total Prosthetics - Curricular Options for Clinically-oriented Preclinical Course.

2.

Dr Thomas Shiozawa, MME-D Tübingen with the project Development and Evaluation of Combined Technical and Didactic Tutor Training for the Dissection Course.

The following is a summary of the winning projects and summaries of the free-text rationales of the reviewers indicating why consider the winning projects worthy of the award:

Dr Nicole Rafai, MPH, Aachen with the project Methodological Diversity in Total Prosthetics - Curricular Options for Clinically-oriented Preclinical Course.

Summary of the winner:

Introduction: Pre-clinical dental teaching is traditionally very technical, leaving noticeable deficits in the (clinical) understanding of students of complex prosthetic work in terms of the individual steps involved.

Aims: The aim of the project was therefore to change the curriculum of a preclinical introductory course so that it would meet the requirements of modern teaching with a clinical focus and would improve the (clinical) contextual understanding of the students.

Methods: For the Phantom II course (Topic: Total Prostheses), the new curriculum was developed following the 6 steps according to Kern. Aside from the learning needs analysis, other essential elements were the development of the learning target catalogue and a targeted selection of learning target-oriented teaching and testing methods. In addition, a video-based learning program (eModul) was used, which allows the individual steps to be visualized in context.

Results: The curriculum was used in 2010 as a clinically-oriented blended learning course. Important new elements of the course were small-group work, training with simulated patients, clinical seminars and the use of e-learning. The learning targets were monitored through OSPE (Objective Structured Practical Examination). The results show that all the learning targets were achieved. The new course model was unfamiliar to the students. The clinical focus of the course and the variety of methods, including e-learning, was enthusiastically received.

Conclusion: The project aims were all achieved through the described approach. The concept can be viewed as an example for other preparatory preclinical courses.

Appraisal:

• in-depth and comprehensive concept for restructuring dental preclinical courses based on proven and modern teaching methods.
• clear learning targets structured and immediate implementation with excursion to a retirement home. Absolutely exemplary.
• extremely elaborate, didactically very well developed (Kern cycle), evaluation at multiple levels
• innovative, practice and learning target-based approach to implementation of several new teaching approaches and methods in dentistry
• teaching of technical skills in a clinical context, vertical integration of preclinical with clinical aspects, learning target formulation, use of multiple learning methods such as small group work, simulated patients, seminars, promotion of self-study through e-learning, use of knowledge and practical tests

Dr Thomas Shiozawa, MME-D Tübingen with the project Development and Evaluation of Combined Technical and Didactic Tutor Training for the Dissection Course.

Summary of the winner:

Background: Student tutors have a long tradition in anatomy. Nonetheless, their full potential is rarely exploited because little value is placed on their professional and didactic training. This project describes the systematic development of a training curriculum for student tutors for the dissection course. To verify the acceptance of the program, we compared the skills of trained and untrained tutors in a randomized, controlled, single-blind study through evaluations carried out by the supervised students. Good acceptance does not mean that the training curriculum has an effect. Based on the learning goals of tutor training, an obvious task is to check whether trained tutors have an impact on the learning behaviour of students. Using a quantitative cross-sectional analysis, we compared the learning behaviour of the students supervised by trained and untrained tutors.

Methods: The training program was designed with the help of the Model Curriculum Development by Kern. For the needs analysis, the results of the literature search were complemented by data from a survey among students and two focus group interviews with tutors. The training curriculum was designed based on these results. For the evaluation of acceptance, 10 trained and 10 untrained tutors were included in the study. Using a self-developed evaluation form, students assessed the skills of the tutors through 11 items on a 5-point Likert scale. Students were randomly assigned to their tutors and did not know if their tutor had been trained or not. In a second step, the same students (n=197) were asked to describe their learning behaviour using a LIST questionnaire (Wild, Schiefele et al. 1992). Through a factor analysis the dimensions of the learning behaviour were extracted. The factor scores of the extracted dimensions were calculated for both groups to determine differences in learning behaviour.

Results: In accordance with the literature, students want tutors with good didactic skills, sufficient background knowledge and practical skills. Tutors would like support in the form of training in didactic and practical methods. As a result, we developed a tutor training programme which combines subject and didactic training. In the acceptance evaluation, students nominally assessed trained tutors better in all categories better compared to the untrained tutors. They received a significantly better score (p<0.05) in the categories “teaching of basic preparation techniques” (4.31±0.86 vs. 3.89±1.05), “creating a positive group atmosphere” (4.69±0.73 vs. 4.44±0.88), “learning support” (4.24±1.03 vs. 3.79±1.16) and “visualisation” (3.99±1.11 vs. 3.56±1.17). Factor analysis of the LIST questionnaire revealed eight dimensions which explain 47.57% of the total variance. These eight dimensions include: comprehension learning, attention, organisation, cooperative learning, time management, effort, repetition and learning environment. A comparison of the factor scores results in a significant difference on the cooperative learning scale: students who are supervised by trained tutors more frequently study together with fellow students (factor score in cooperative learning 0.194 vs. 0.205, p=0.018.). A weak trend can be seen on the organisation scale: students who are supervised by trained tutors are a little better organised in their learning (factor score in learning organisation 0115 vs. 0.122, p=0.16).

Conclusions: Our needs analysis showed that specific training for tutors of the dissection course is desired. The training curriculum we developed, which focuses on the improvement of teaching skills, background knowledge and practical skills is accepted well by the students. The training also shows an objectively measurable effect: students who are supervised by trained teachers study with their fellow students significantly more often and tend to be somewhat better organised in their learning. Accordingly, it would seem sensible to introduce didactic and content training for tutors in other subjects and courses.

Appraisal:

• high relevance to preclinical training, didactically well implemented (Kern cycle), controlled trial, high-level publication
• comprehensive needs and task-oriented, didactic, technical and skills-based training of student tutors; competence-orientated for peer tutors and students; comparison of self-assessment and external assessment; important work in relation to quality management of teaching and scientific support of teaching and learning interventions.
• well-founded comparison of baseline and intervention, with verifiable and effects which are likely repeatable.
• didactic training for student tutors is innovative, promotes the diversity of methods.
• design of a training curriculum for peer tutors which was carried with great didactic and methodical care

As finalists of the GMA award for young medical educators, the following candidates also deserve praise:

Working Group Dr. Antonio Sarikas, Barbara Zollner, Christoph Berg, TU Munich with the project: Pharmacases.de - a Student-centred Teaching and Learning Project.

Summary of the working group:

Pharmacases.de is a student-centred teaching and learning project aiming at high practical relevance which is run by the Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, TU Munich. Using realistic case studies from clinical practice (http://www.pharmacases.de), theory and practice of general and specialised pharmacology are discussed. This is interactive, using multimedia and with the involvement of interdisciplinary knowledge and experience from other disciplines. The central component is the e-learning platform http://www.pharmacases.de which currently holds 33 case studies (as of 10/2011) which was created by students in their Practical Year (pharmacology elective) in close collaboration with students in the Practical Year in other disciplines. Students are able to work through the cases on their own on the internet and are also integrated into the lectures and seminars of the Institute. The website also has a discussion forum set up and it is possible to give direct feedback. In the next phase of the project pharmacases.de will be supported by a monthly face-to-face event in which students can discuss difficult cases directly with the authors.

The methodological and didactic distinctive feature of pharmacases.de is the use of peer teaching which is used on two levels:

1.

Students in their Practical Year research and write case studies independently. Subject-specific expertise is brought in through consultation with students of other disciplines in their Practical Year (student competence network).

2.

Case studies designed in this way are available to all students in a multi-dimensional way (e-learning platform, discussion forum and face-to-face phase).

On both levels, the design of procedures and content is very close to professional medical practice (multidisciplinary patient care, case conferences) and consequently teach a high level of practical expertise and job maturity.

The submitted applications again demonstrated the impressive quality of current projects in medical education. It is highly encouraging to see even young colleagues displaying best scientific practice and professionalisation of teaching. Based on these positive experiences, the GMA award for young medical educators will now be awarded annually.

The board of the GMA would like to thank the members of the committee very much at this point. All six submissions were reviewed by each of the following 10 committee members:

• Dr Stefan Beckers
• Dr Philip von der Borch
• Dr Nora Celebi
• Dr Jan Ehlers
• Dr Jan Hilgers
• Dr Peter Iblher
• Dr Hanns Iblher
• Dr Christoph Nikendei, MME
• Katrin Rockenbauch, Psycholgist
• Dr Barbara Stadelmann, MME (Bern)

The GMA award for young medical educators will be awarded in 2012 as well. The final date for submissions for 2012 is the 15^th January.

For more information on the award and the submission process, visit the homepage of the German Society for Medical Education in http://www.gesellschaft-medizinische-ausbildung.org => GMA-Information => Prizes.

Only young medical educators from Germany, Switzerland and Austria can apply for this award.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.